Table 6 Summary of key findings (regression analysis)
| Â | Â | Country | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Burkina Faso | Mali | Niger | Senegal | Sahel | ||
Factors affecting FMNR | Three categories of factors observed here | |||||
Pre-disposing factors featured by: • Landholding size | Positive influence | Positive influence | Positive influence | No significant influence | Positive influence | |
Facilitating factors featured by access and use of information through: • Ownership of cell phone • Being member of community-based organization (CBO) Access to credit | Positive influence Positive influence Negative influence | Positive influence Positive influence No significant influence | Positive influence Positive influence No significant influence | Positive influence Positive influence Positive influence | Positive influence Positive influence Positive influence | |
Re-enforcing factors featured by: • Average distance to the main market as a proxy of the market attractiveness of AFTPs • Existence of an operational local convention • Existence of an operational land management commission | No significant influence No significant influence Positive influence | No significant influence Positive influence | Positive influence Positive influence No significant influence | Positive influence No significant influence Negative influence | Positive influence Positive influence Negative influence | |
Effects on livelihoods | Effects on income Dose response function indicating an increase of income given a range level of trees being kept in the farmland as a result of FMNR practice Treatment effects function that shows the marginal effect of FMNR on income | The revenue received from tree products tend to be stable at 30,000 CFA/ha (US$60) when the density of tree is higher than 20/ha. The maximum amount expected to be received by selling tree products is 40,000 CFA/ha (US$80) with a farm of 15/ha | FMNR practitioners with 20 trees/ha are better off in terms of revenues received from tree products (42,000 CFA or US$84). This amount sharply decline when the density ranges from 21 to 40 trees/ha. After the 40 trees/ha threshold, the revenue perceived from tree products gradually increase with every unit of tree increase during the practice of FMNR to be stabilized around 40000 CFA (US$80). | Exhibit with Senegal the lowest amount of incomes that can be expected from tree products (15,000 to 17,000 CFA i.e., $30 to $34) | Exhibit with Niger the lowest amount of incomes that can be expected from tree products (15,000 to 20,000 CFA i.e., $30 to $40) | Indicates a sharp increase of income (up to a 22,000 CFA or US$44 threshold) from trees products when the number of trees being managed in the farmland ranges from 10 to 40/ha Farmers who are less involved in the practice of FMNR (i.e., farm with less than 40 trees/ha) are more sensitive to income change than those with more trees (i.e., higher than 40/ha) as the effects of changes in income tend to be stable as it appeared in the plot. |
| Â | Effects on crop production Dose response function indicating an increase of income given a range level of trees being kept in the farmland as a result of FMNR practice | The maximum effect is noted when the density of trees ranges from 20 to 40/ha, indicating: | ||||
| Â | An increase of the expected quantity of cereals produced by 401.38Â kg/ha | 198.9Â kg/ha increase observed among the FMNR practitioners | 112.76Â kg/ha maximum observed in Niger | 132.12Â kg/ha increase observed in Senegal | General increase of crop production by 274.25Â kg/ha in the Sahel as the whole | |
Treatment effects function that shows the marginal effect of FMNR on income | The plot suggests that for FMNR practitioners who have less than 40 trees/ha, every one percentage-point increase in keeping and managing trees in their farmland decreased the effects on crop production, and the stronger effect was associated with the management of about 20 trees/ha with a: | |||||
+14% increase in Burkina Faso | +4% increase in Mali | +3% increase in Niger | Only +1% increase in Senegal | +5% general increase in the Sahel as the whole | ||
Effects on calorie intakes Dose response function indicating an increase of income given a range level of trees being kept in the farmland as a result of FMNR practice Treatment effects function that shows the marginal effect of FMNR on income | According to the treatment effects plots, the contribution of trees on food security tends to decrease when the density ranges from 15-20 trees/ha, after the 20 trees/ha threshold, and increase in the number of trees kept and managed in the farmland increase the food consumption score gradually with every unit increase in the number of trees managed by the farmers to a maximum threshold level of FCS: | |||||
The score tends to be constant at 22 points increased when the minimum density is 20 trees/ha | Same as Burkina Faso | 30 points increased in observed in Niger | The effects tend also to be constant at 30 points increased of the food consumption score in Senegal | 30 points increased is also observed in the Sahel as the whole | ||